Oil and gas exploration and production in ecosystems of
high biodiversity value pose both risks and opportunities
for energy companies. In terms of risks, operations
can have negative primary and secondary impacts
on ecosystems and the quality of air, water and soil.
Avoiding, minimizing and mitigating these impacts should
be the priority of project managers and companies.
Further information on primary and secondary
impacts and responses can be found in Good Practice
in the Prevention and Mitigation of Primary and
Secondary Biodiversity Impacts.
However, in an increasingly inter-connected global
economy, pressure from governments, communities,
shareholders and non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) is building for companies to go beyond
mitigating negative impacts and to take advantage of
opportunities to benefit biodiversity conservation in and
around project sites and in the countries and regions
where they operate. Such activities are particularly
important in countries where capacity and resources
for protecting the environment are scarce or are not a
priority because of more immediate social and economic
needs.
Companies can make investments in biodiversity
conservation at both a project level and a company
level. At the project level, such activities are likely to be
strongly driven by the results of a project Environmental
and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and any identified
value associated with actions that go beyond mitigation to
benefit valuable and threatened ecological resources. At
the company level, opportunities to benefit biodiversity
conservation can be a key part of an overall company
environmental and social responsibility strategy that
recognizes the strong role of biodiversity conservation
in sustainable development and the business value of a
positive public reputation on biodiversity issues.
Further information on ESIAs can be found in
Integrating Biodiversity into Environmental and
Social Impact Assessment Processes.
By proactively capitalizing on opportunities to improve
the state of conservation in ecosystems with high
biodiversity value, companies can ideally leave an area’s
biodiversity, or the local capacity to conserve it, in better
condition than before oil or gas activity began. Such
activities are distinct from offsets, which are designed
to reduce and compensate for the negative impacts
of a project (see Box 1). While activities designed to
benefit biodiversity may be similar to those intended
to meet no net loss goals, they often encompass a
broader geographic area or timeframe. Investment in an
opportunity to benefit biodiversity assumes that shortterm loss of or damage to biodiversity as a result of oil
and gas production can lead to a long-term net benefit
to both the economy and the environment through the
reinvestment of economic rents from the oil or gas
activities, both from government revenue and company
donations, into conservation beyond the life of a project.
In some countries, the concept of promoting benefits
to biodiversity has become standard, and sometimes
required, practice. In Western Australia, for example, the
government approval process for new natural resource
development projects requires developers to contribute
to “net conservation benefits” that go beyond typical
project-specific mitigation measures. The policy builds
on the idea that, although impacts from a project will
most likely be felt at a local level, the conservation values
associated with the impacted resources are often more
generalized and widespread. Consequently, addressing
these broader values requires a different approach
than the impact management strategies used at the
development site